Temptation: Immediacy and certainty

Last registered on August 11, 2024
View Trial History

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Temptation: Immediacy and certainty
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0004651
Initial registration date
September 12, 2019

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
September 16, 2019, 2:03 PM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Last updated
August 11, 2024, 5:17 PM EDT

Last updated is the most recent time when changes to the trial's registration were published.

Locations

Country
United States of America
Region

Primary Investigator

Name
Lucas Reddinger
Affiliation
UCSB
Contact Primary Investigator

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

Status
Completed
Start date
2019-10-28
End date
2019-11-06
Keywords
Behavior, Labor
Additional Keywords
present bias, dynamic inconsistency, quasi-hyperbolic discounting, time preferences, risk preferences, immediacy effect, certainty effect, experimental economics
JEL code(s)
C91, D80, D90
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Is an option especially tempting when it is both immediate and certain? I test the effect of risk on the present-bias factor given quasi-hyperbolic discounting. In my experiment, workers allocate about thirty to fifty minutes of real-effort tasks between two weeks. I study dynamic consistency by comparing choices made two days in advance of the workday with choices made when work is imminent. My novel design permits estimation of present bias using a decision with a consequence that is both immediate and certain. I find greater present bias when the consequence is certain. This finding has implications for any economic decision involving a present-biased decision-maker, including labor contracting and consumer good pricing. Finally I offer a methodological remedy for experimental economists.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Reddinger, Lucas. 2024. "Temptation: Immediacy and certainty." AEA RCT Registry. August 11. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.4651-4.0
Sponsors & Partners
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Intervention Start Date
2019-10-28
Intervention End Date
2019-11-06

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Primary outcomes of interest are the real-effort task allocations chosen by subjects between two weeks.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
The intake questionnaire includes a short demographic survey; these data will be used to predict attrition and may also be used as controls in prediction of primary results.
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Subjects must complete an intake questionnaire that tests comprehension of the experimental instructions; subjects must answer all questions correctly to be enrolled in the trial.

On day 0 (e.g., Monday of week 1), subjects are asked to allocate approximately 30 minutes of work between day 2 (e.g., Wednesday of week 1) and Day 9 (e.g., Wednesday of week 2). On Day 2, subjects are again asked to allocate work between day 2 and day 9. For each subject, an independent fair coin toss determines whether decisions from day 0 or day 2 are implemented.

If a subject is assigned to the Risky Day treatment, she learns the result of this coin toss after her decisions on day 2. If a subject is assigned to the Certain Day treatment, she learns the result of this coin toss before her decisions on day 2.

On each day that decisions are made, subjects are asked to allocate a fixed present value budget of real-effort tasks between days 2 and 9.
Subjects make allocation decisions for each of five gross interest rates R ∈ {0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5}.

If a subject is assigned to the Risky Rate treatment, after she makes all of her decisions, one of her decisions from the selected day is chosen at random with uniform probability to be implemented. If a subject is assigned to the Certain Rate treatment, her decision from the selected day for the gross interest rate R = 1.25 is chosen with certainty to be implemented.

Each subject is assigned to a Day treatment and a Rate treatment, resulting in a two-by-two factorial design. Each subject is fully informed of the procedures and mechanisms used in her assigned treatment.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Subjects are enrolled in the order in which they complete the intake questionnaire. Treatments are assigned to subjects using a round-robin algorithm as subjects are enrolled. Randomization of gross interest rates is done in advance using a computer program (using unique seeds to permit replication).
Randomization Unit
Subjects are individually assigned to one of the four treatments.
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
The trial will have 192 to 208 subjects; each subject represents a cluster.
Sample size: planned number of observations
Each subject makes 20 allocation decisions. The trial will thus yield 3840 to 4160 observations.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
Certain Day, Certain Rate: 64 subjects.
Certain Day, Risky Rate: 64 subjects.
Risky Day, Certain Rate: 32 subjects.
Risky Day, Risky Rate: 32 subjects.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
UCSB, Office of Research, Human Subjects Committee
IRB Approval Date
2019-08-30
IRB Approval Number
56-19-0621
Analysis Plan

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
Yes
Intervention Completion Date
November 06, 2019, 12:00 +00:00
Data Collection Complete
Yes
Data Collection Completion Date
November 06, 2019, 12:00 +00:00
Final Sample Size: Number of Clusters (Unit of Randomization)
220 subjects gave consent to participate.
Was attrition correlated with treatment status?
No
Final Sample Size: Total Number of Observations
180 subjects completed all three sessions.
Final Sample Size (or Number of Clusters) by Treatment Arms
30 subjects in baseline, 32 in Risky Day Certain Rate, 60 in Certain Day Risky Rate, 58 in Certain Day Certain Rate.
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
Yes
Public Data URL
https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/ZE3WJ

Program Files

Program Files
Yes
Program Files URL
https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/ZE3WJ
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Abstract
Is an option especially tempting when it is both immediate and certain? I test the effect of risk on the present-bias factor given quasi-hyperbolic discounting. In my experiment, workers allocate about thirty to fifty minutes of real-effort tasks between two weeks. I study dynamic consistency by comparing choices made two days in advance of the workday with choices made when work is imminent. My novel design permits estimation of present-bias using a decision with a consequence that is both immediate and certain. I find greater present-bias when the consequence is certain. This finding has implications for any economic decision involving a present-biased decision-maker, including labor contracting and consumer good pricing. Finally I offer a methodological remedy for experimental economists.
Citation
Reddinger, J. Lucas. "Temptation: Immediacy and Certainty". arXiv [Econ.GN], 2024, http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.14955.
URL
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2407.14955

Reports & Other Materials